|
I'm really interested in FoW. And I like to dive in head-first with an army that's gonna kick my rear end and force me to learn the game, so I'm thinking Rangers or something like that.
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2010 02:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 11:55 |
|
|
FirstCongoWar posted:Paratroopers! Yeah, that's the other thing I was considering actually. Paratroopers and Rangers are fuckawesome.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2010 02:16
|
|
|
PaintVagrant posted:Is it just me or does that 10mm pendraken stuff look a lot nicer than than FoW models? 6/10 mm owns compared to 15mm
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2010 19:04
|
|
|
I don't think I've ever heard the term bongo used for anything (in the US).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2010 19:04
|
|
|
Chenghiz posted:Anything ... else 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2010 00:49
|
|
|
Lord Commissar posted:
I always referred to those as gazongas, not bongos
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2010 01:24
|
|
|
Lord Commissar posted:Hey guys, we have our own website, but let's just hotlink to photobucket anyway! They really have the worst loving website. I never even use it when I'm ordering stuff for people.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2010 22:37
|
|
|
Lord Commissar posted:I just meant, if you compared it to a similar-sized force. I know how much I spent on my 225-model IG army, compared to this (which has 373), and this was cheaper. Yeah... I'd equate one IG dude to one base of standard infantry, model-wise (I know the points don't come out to be the same, but still).
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2010 22:27
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:It's more like a marine to a base of infantry really, there's not that many bases in an army. My 1k points of Germans has about 20 IIRC. Oh I understand that, I just meant like... the amount of effort needed to get the model/base ready for gaming.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2010 07:25
|
|
|
Fuckin' Flames of War, now I'm gonna have to start playing that drat game. Found I can pretty much make a 2k Mid War Ranger battalion for like 125$, and I'm all over that poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2010 18:12
|
|
|
moths posted:I keep looking at FoW, and the models and rules seem awesome, but I absolutely cannot get past the Nazi stuff. Good thing most germans weren't Nazi's then :P
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2010 01:29
|
|
|
Lord Commissar posted:For those curious about Flames of War: For someone about to get into FoW, this helped a lot.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2010 04:49
|
|
|
That is rad as gently caress.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2010 16:56
|
|
|
Silhouette posted:Oh god yes. It's the best 28mm game GW's released, it's basically LoTR with Mordheim's campaign rules. Gorkamorka would like to have words with you 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2010 21:04
|
|
|
Got to play my first FoW game today! My Ranger battalion against a Panzergrenadier kompanie. I lost at the end but I murdalized all of his infantry. He didn't end up taking any objectives, but I failed my company motivation since my last Compay Co. died. FoW owns.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2010 03:53
|
|
|
Yeah the guys around here have been really psyched about it. Sounds rad as hell.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2010 18:28
|
|
|
big_g posted:I really, really hope this pays true to the Polish defence against the German invasion and not some bullshit unstoppable blitzkrieg fictional bullshit. I don't see why they would treat it any differently than their other products. The game rules are relatively simplified but they don't skimp on historical accuracy.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2010 21:39
|
|
|
Tamir Lenk posted:Depends. High initiative mounted armies tend to get pretty open tables by choosing Steppes when they can. How does the terrain work? Do you roll to see what kind of terrain you'll be playing on? FoG always looked really loving rad to me.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 24, 2010 20:54
|
|
|
I imagine cavalry-heavy armies have a much higher initiative, then. That sounds really cool.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2010 02:12
|
|
|
Does it help if you stick to armies that are in the same time period? Or is it not a big deal having two armies fight each other that were otherwise separated by 500 years?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2010 18:14
|
|
|
lilljonas posted:Usually, yes. For most wargames I think it is easiest and most balanced to field the armies against an historical enemy. Romans vs. Gauls are usually a balanced fight with each sides having distinct strenghts and weaknesses. So do Crusader armies against Saracens. But fielding a slowly marching wall of Greek hoplites against an all cavalry steppe army is a bit more difficult, as the armies are not really made for an exciting battle. Well, I meant for FoG in particular. I've paged through the rules once or twice at work but didn't get much out of it other than the basics of the unit stats.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2010 03:41
|
|
|
Alright, I got 3 M3 75mm GMCs coming in and then my 2k mid war Rangers will be done: Company HQ Darby 2 full Ranger companies with mortars 1 full ranger company without mortars Full Sherman Platoon Chemical Mortar Platoon 105 battery 75mm GMC Platoon with AA .50s That should be 2k on the dot
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2010 22:44
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:Wait... what? You get Ranger COMPANIES? Yeah, you buy ranger companies because they're a more elite unit. It's the same with british Commandos. Each company is 1 or 2 platoons. Each platoon is 6 rifle/mg teams + platoon HQ with the option to buy a mortar. Though each platoon operates independently, ranger comapnies are deployed all at the same time. Cool thing about rangers though, is that only the actual Ranger Platoons count for whether or not I have to take a company command test. The support platoons I buy don't count as being destroyed or being on the table for a company morale check. So while you have to still deal with all of my support I'll never even have to think about running away until you also kill 4 platoons of dudes.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2010 23:36
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:That's still an obscene amount of dude on the table. IIRC a Commando army would be drat expensive with each platoon being 330 points basic, so I'm guessing Rangers are similar. Pretty similar, but fearless trained instead of vets. They obviously aren't as good in combat as commandos (like anyone loving is), but they can Truscot Trot through difficult going and they all have mountaineers. A full company with the two mortars is 320 points.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2010 03:57
|
|
|
Lord Commissar posted:That's fine, but the sculpts look EXACTLY like samurais they really don't
|
|
#
¿
Oct 7, 2010 21:36
|
|
|
No Pun Intended posted:Is there any reason, other than looking good, to put bases on my FoW Tanks? nope e: and personally I don't like the way it looks because whenever you play on a board that doesn't fit your basing style it looks out of place
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2010 07:53
|
|
|
That makes me wanna play Shogun: Total War so bad
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2010 20:05
|
|
|
Devlan Mud posted:Is this the FoW train finally?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2011 23:47
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:I think it's awesome that this train is getting people amped to play the Polish. My awesomely mustachioed rode-his-horse-against-panzers granddad would be pleased. gently caress yes Polish resistance
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2011 22:35
|
|
|
The Oldest Man posted:So when putting together a FoW army what is the milestone to aim for, points-wise? 1500-2000, depending on what the locals in your area tend to play. The scale is very similar to 40k/Fantasy if you've ever played that, but for your infantry platoons you're buying stands instead of individual guys.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2011 05:36
|
|
|
shotgunbadger posted:So I'm kinda being tempted by FoW, looks like exactly my kind of historical game. I'm really not sure who I want to play though, everyone seems to have so many cool options. Well, first thing's first: do you want to play early, mid, or late war? Because the options, and points costs are quite different between them.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2011 06:15
|
|
|
Lord Commissar posted:Big clearance at Foundry. Is this an Australian site?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2011 02:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 11:55 |
|
|
Lord Commissar posted:No, they're in Nottingham. Well, okay then. I was just wondering why a Tactical squad box on clearance cost almost 50 USD.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 16, 2011 05:00
|
|